Toyota Going out and Williams Engine Supply Conundrum?!

Charlie-Bravo

I'm not sure if I am getting this....

Williams are looking to get out of their engine deal with Toyota. But why would they do that if Toyota may not be about next year? Well it's not like they are calling their bluff. So I suppose it is just business and Williams not hanging around to find out if Toyota will bother to be in F1 next year.

Anyone got any other angle on this?

Slutmonkey57b

Also, the Toyota deal is tied into employing Nakajima, which is another reason to drop them. Renault want to expand their engine department into a moneymaker (such as it is in F1 terms anyway) and as Merc have 3 teams on the payroll, don't see why Renault can't either.

EvilMonkey

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Also, the Toyota deal is tied into employing Nakajima, which is another reason to drop them. Renault want to expand their engine department into a moneymaker (such as it is in F1 terms anyway) and as Merc have 3 teams on the payroll, don't see why Renault can't either.

They keep blowing Red Bull engines, and Red Bull are going to ditch them if they can :eek:

If Toyota have signed up to the Concorde how can they pull out? all they can do is sell up.

Slutmonkey57b

No they don't, Vettel keeps blowing engines. Webber's not having a problem at all.

vectra

The reason Williams is ditching the Toyota engine is because they are pushing on with their development of the Flywheel Kers system and intend using it next season. The Toyota engine is not a suitable match for this system.

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

No they don't, Vettel keeps blowing engines. Webber's not having a problem at all.

Not true
All these engines are fully electronically controlled. It is virtually impossible to blow them via driving style.
The same could be aid for Kimi ( which it often was said )

Just a case of bad luck really.

Slutmonkey57b

Nothing's a suitable match for William's flywheel because it doesn't work and having a flailing wheel in the middle of an F1 car upsetting the balance is nonsensical.

Bounce the engine off the limiter too much and see where it gets you. Like tyres and fuel engines are affected by driving style. Or rather bad driving can certainly wreck your engine where being careful wont. Why else do the teams turn the engines down when they're cruising?

vectra

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Nothing's a suitable match for William's flywheel because it doesn't work and having a flailing wheel in the middle of an F1 car upsetting the balance is nonsensical.

Bounce the engine off the limiter too much and see where it gets you. Like tyres and fuel engines are affected by driving style. Or rather bad driving can certainly wreck your engine where being careful wont. Why else do the teams turn the engines down when they're cruising?

A rev limiter does exactly what it say on the tin,
It stop the revs going above 18k... which is what they use anyway.. so not his fault.

Cookie_Monster

vectra wrote: »

The reason Williams is ditching the Toyota engine is because they are pushing on with their development of the Flywheel Kers system and intend using it next season. The Toyota engine is not a suitable match for this system.

But thats dead and buried for next season isin't it? Thought KERS was being totally dropped or will it still be optional?

vectra

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

But thats dead and buried for next season isin't it? Thought KERS was being totally dropped or will it still be optional?

FOTA have said they wont use it
Williams are not part of FOTA so can do as they wish
They also say they are continue developing it as a system for future road cars

Barry_Scott

I would love to see Williams link up again with Renault. All they need to do then is bring back the 1994-1997 livery!

muckwarrior

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Nothing's a suitable match for William's flywheel because it doesn't work and having a flailing wheel in the middle of an F1 car upsetting the balance is nonsensical.

You should tell Frank Williams then. He's probably wasting millions using some of the best engineers in the world to develop it, but obviously you know better...

vectra

muckwarrior wrote: »

You should tell Frank Williams then. He's probably wasting millions using some of the best engineers in the world to develop it, but obviously you know better...

PMSL

EvilMonkey

muckwarrior wrote: »

You should tell Frank Williams then. He's probably wasting millions using some of the best engineers in the world to develop it, but obviously you know better...

They want to sell it to train and bus manufactures.

vectra wrote: »

FOTA have said they wont use it
Williams are not part of FOTA so can do as they wish
They also say they are continue developing it as a system for future road cars

All the engine suppliers are part of FOTA(except cosworth), would any of them spend money modifying the engine for Williams?

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

All the engine suppliers are part of FOTA(except cosworth), would any of them spend money modifying the engine for Williams?

Well then
Seems as though they would use Cossie engines.
They are not prepared to drop the Kers.

smooch71

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Bounce the engine off the limiter too much and see where it gets you. Like tyres and fuel engines are affected by driving style. Or rather bad driving can certainly wreck your engine where being careful wont. Why else do the teams turn the engines down when they're cruising?

You're wrong.

In a modern Formula 1 car, driving style or "bad driving" does not cause an engine to blow.

The drivers can't over-rev or abuse the engines.

vectra

smooch71 wrote: »

You're wrong.

In a modern Formula 1 car, driving style or "bad driving" does not cause an engine to blow.

The drivers can't over-rev or abuse the engines.

Thanks

thegoth

smooch71 wrote: »

You're wrong.

In a modern Formula 1 car, driving style or "bad driving" does not cause an engine to blow.

The drivers can't over-rev or abuse the engines.

+1

Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously knows more than experts like Gary Anderson or Martin Brundle. Brundle said during the race that in circumstances like this, where one drivers engine fails alot more than anothers, that it normally turns out to be an engine installation issue, i.e someone installed in engine incorrectly. Maybe a bad machanic in his side of the garage ???

EvilMonkey

thegoth wrote: »

+1

Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously knows more than experts like Gary Anderson or Martin Brundle. Brundle said during the race that in circumstances like this, where one drivers engine fails alot more than anothers, that it normally turns out to be an engine installation issue, i.e someone installed in engine incorrectly. Maybe a bad machanic in his side of the garage ???

Brundle has also at times said when the cars bounce over the kerbs or bumps and the wheels spin for a fraction of a second causing the engine to bounce off the limiter damages the engine.
Or when slip streaming if the map is not right the car can go over 18000RPM the limiter kicks in and can damage the engine.

Now my opinion would be if that is the case then its possible that Vettel is the problem but the engineers should spot this and map the engine to Vettels driving style so the limiter never kicks in (as much as possible).
So i would put the blame on the engineers responsible for the engine.

smooch71 wrote: »

You're wrong.

In a modern Formula 1 car, driving style or "bad driving" does not cause an engine to blow.

The drivers can't over-rev or abuse the engines.

I'm no expert but my understanding is when the limiter kicks in it cuts the spark causing some cylinders to shut down for a fraction of a second reducing the oil pressure or putting an extra load on the other cylinders and causing extra wear on the engine.(This could and probably is bull****, all i know is hitting the limiter is bad for the engine even in F1)

But we will never know what the problem was we dont even know what failed in the engine and if it has been the same failure each time.

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

Brundle has also at times said when the cars bounce over the kerbs or bumps and the wheels spin for a fraction of a second causing the engine to bounce off the limiter damages the engine.
Or when slip streaming if the map is not right the car can go over 18000RPM the limiter kicks in and can damage the engine.

Now my opinion would be if that is the case then its possible that Vettel is the problem but the engineers should spot this and map the engine to Vettels driving style so the limiter never kicks in (as much as possible).
So i would put the blame on the engineers responsible for the engine.



I'm no expert but my understanding is when the limiter kicks in it cuts the spark causing some cylinders to shut down for a fraction of a second reducing the oil pressure or putting an extra load on the other cylinders and causing extra wear on the engine.(This could and probably is bull****, all i know is hitting the limiter is bad for the engine even in F1)

But we will never know what the problem was we dont even know what failed in the engine and if it has been the same failure each time.

So,
Explain this to us.

Limiter cuts in at 18k,
If the map is not right it can go over 18k.
are you saying this is the problem?

smooch71

EvilMonkey wrote: »

I'm no expert but my understanding is when the limiter kicks in it cuts the spark causing some cylinders to shut down for a fraction of a second reducing the oil pressure or putting an extra load on the other cylinders and causing extra wear on the engine.(This could and probably is bull****, all i know is hitting the limiter is bad for the engine even in F1)

But we will never know what the problem was we dont even know what failed in the engine and if it has been the same failure each time.

Most rev limiters like those fitted to road cars work on that principle but I'm not too sure how the limiter on an F1 engine works.

Somehow I'd imagine it's more complex than that. Apart from engine mapping, poorly manufactured parts can also cause engines to fail. Bearing in mind how finely tuned, precise and stressed a Formula 1 engine is, an oil seal that's fractions of a milimetre thinner on one side can (and has) cause an engine failure.

thegoth

EvilMonkey. I bow to your superior knowledge of how an F1 engine works

amacachi

Brundle has a habit of changing his mind about things when it suits him. A few years back when Raikkonen was with McLaren and constantly had reliability problems and he said that it must have had something to do with his driving style.

vectra

amacachi wrote: »

A few years back when Raikkonen was with McLaren and constantly had reliability problems and he said that it must have had something to do with his driving style.

Wasnt it Ron said Ferrari will have to build a Tractor or something for kimi

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

So,
Explain this to us.

Limiter cuts in at 18k,
If the map is not right it can go over 18k.
are you saying this is the problem?

If the engine map is right it should never reach the point where the limiter kicks in, while still giving max power like all things in F1 its a compromise.
The limiter kicking in too much that can cause a problem.

smooch71 wrote: »

Most rev limiters like those fitted to road cars work on that principle but I'm not too sure how the limiter on an F1 engine works.

Somehow I'd imagine it's more complex than that. Apart from engine mapping, poorly manufactured parts can also cause engines to fail. Bearing in mind how finely tuned, precise and stressed a Formula 1 engine is, an oil seal that's fractions of a milimetre thinner on one side can (and has) cause an engine failure.

Yeah i would imagine its allot more complex than i can explain
But like you say something a fraction of a millimetre can cause a problem.
I am not saying its what caused Vettels problems, i have no idea.
Just that because the engine are limited and cant over rev doesn't mean its not bad to hit the limiter.
Remember last season Kimi had 2 failures from some part that wasn't up to spec in the manufacturing process.

thegoth wrote: »

EvilMonkey. I bow to your superior knowledge of how an F1 engine works

I wouldn't say its that superior.
By the way i agree with you id is more than likely something on the Renault side.

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

Wasnt it Ron said Ferrari will have to build a Tractor or something for kimi

Yeah when he was in i hate kimi mode and wouldn't speak to him. God forbid it was McLaren that was the problem.

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

Yeah when he was in i hate kimi mode and wouldn't speak to him. God forbid it was McLaren that was the problem.

Did you see my earlier reply to you about the rev limiter?

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

Did you see my earlier reply to you about the rev limiter?

Probably my fault with the double post, look up

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

If the engine map is right it should never reach the point where the limiter kicks in, while still giving max power like all things in F1 its a compromise.
The limiter kicking in too much that can cause a problem.

I would very much doubt that would be the problem.
These engines are identical to last yer.. Right??
if so
then last year they were running happily at 19k revs.
that is a full 1k over the limit.
I dont think the rev limiter would allow for this amount?
even if it did.. it would be a safe haven for any F1 engine as last year when the rev limiter would kick in and say allow it go 1k over then that would be 20k
thats a full 2k over this years limit
I still say engine build problem

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

I would very much doubt that would be the problem.
These engines are identical to last yer.. Right??
if so
then last year they were running happily at 19k revs.
that is a full 1k over the limit.
I dont think the rev limiter would allow for this amount?
even if it did.. it would be a safe haven for any F1 engine as last year when the rev limiter would kick in and say allow it go 1k over then that would be 20k
thats a full 2k over this years limit
I still say engine build problem

The problem is the limiter cutting in to stop the engine going over 18000, not going over it.
If it was going over 18000 the FIA would penalise them so the limiter to stop this is harsh on the engine maybe worse than over reving the engine, there only limited at 18000 because its in the rules.
And yes its unlikely to be the problem i think its a Renault install/manufacture problem, it was a new engine that blew.
I was just saying it can cause extra wear on the engine.

Slutmonkey57b

EvilMonkey wrote: »

Brundle has also at times said when the cars bounce over the kerbs or bumps and the wheels spin for a fraction of a second causing the engine to bounce off the limiter damages the engine.
Or when slip streaming if the map is not right the car can go over 18000RPM the limiter kicks in and can damage the engine.

Exactly - reducing the limiter from 19k to 18k doesn't change the fact that bouncing off the limiter isn't considered a good thing. Brundle, Coulthard and Davidson have all said the same thing. And the fact that if you listen to race commentary the teams turn the engines down to save them. And that Spa and Monza are predicted to be "hard" on engines causing more failures due to.... longer periods of high revs and stresses. So yeah, a driver that drives close to the limit too much couldn't *possibly* be doing more damage to the engine than one who isn't. Dur. Of course, if you want a definative answer, you can ask someone who makes F1 engines, but you can be assured they're not allowed to talk to you anyway.

EvilMonkey wrote: »

They want to sell it to train and bus manufactures.

Thank you. Ever wonder why Williams are the only team to even consider using a flywheel? These cars are so finely balanced Brawn moved the brake calipers from the side to the bottom of the wheel to change the centre of gravity. Suggesting a bloody flywheel isn't going to bother the car? Give me a break.

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

I was just saying it can cause extra wear on the engine.

I would doubt it.
The rev limiter on an engine is there to protect it in the first place aint it?

Cookie_Monster

vectra wrote: »

I would doubt it.
The rev limiter on an engine is there to protect it in the first place aint it?

Yes but something that forces a sudden "stop" or adjustment of revs once the engine hits 18k will have some adverse effect.

vectra

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Yes but something that forces a sudden "stop" or adjustment of revs once the engine hits 18k will have some adverse effect.

It doesnt put any force on components..

Cookie_Monster

vectra wrote: »

It doesnt put any force on components..

But the engine can rev from 10k to 18k in a matter of seconds, something has to react near instantly to this to stop it going higher. Even if it only acts directly on the electronics there has to be some physical force somewhere to stop the engine reving over 18k doesn't there as momentum alone would cause it to keep moving higher for a very small time?

smooch71

Every single engine in every single race at every single track hits the rev limiter on every single lap.

Why don't they all blow up???

BECAUSE REV LIMITERS DO NOT CAUSE ENGINE FAILURES!!!!!

THEY PREVENT THEM!!

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

I would doubt it.
The rev limiter on an engine is there to protect it in the first place aint it?

You said yourself they can go over, last year they were at 19k year before 19k+. Its really there to stop a team getting a penalty from the fia for accidentally going over 18k.
It cuts the spark going to the cylinder turning a V8 into a V7 or a V6 or what ever it needs to guarantee the team dont get a penalty, this puts extra load on the cylinders that are firing. It doesn't blow engine but causes extra ware and reduces the life of the engine.

smooch71 wrote: »

Every single engine in every single race at every single track hits the rev limiter on every single lap.

Why don't they all blow up???

BECAUSE REV LIMITERS DO NOT CAUSE ENGINE FAILURES!!!!!

THEY PREVENT THEM!!

No they very rarely hit the limiter if the engine map is set up right, too much time on the limiter damages the engine. :P

Next time you see the in car graphic with the RPM watch it it will get close to 18000 but rarely hit it, and certainly not every lap.

Some of the manufactures engines can rev higher than the others giving them a power advantage since more power is gained at higher RPM, some to 20k+.
Also a Ferrari engine might last 3 races reving to 19k, but a Renault might not, so Ferrari would have a slight power/reliability advantage over Renault powered cars.
The limiter isn't only to protect the engine but also to reduce the power and equalise the performance between the different manufactures.

This also has an effect of reducing ware on the engine. There not reving as high so they can last longer, same reason they turn the engine map down during a race.

No need to shout. You dont think the rpm limiter causes extra ware on an F1 engine, i do.

smooch71

EvilMonkey wrote: »

Some of the manufactures engines can rev higher than the others giving them a power advantage since more power is gained at higher RPM, some to 20k+.
Also a Ferrari engine might last 3 races reving to 19k, but a Renault might not, so Ferrari would have a slight power/reliability advantage over Renault powered cars.
The limiter isn't only to protect the engine but also to reduce the power and equalise the performance between the different manufactures.

This also has an effect of reducing ware on the engine. There not reving as high so they can last longer, same reason they turn the engine map down during a race.

No need to shout. You dont think the rpm limiter causes extra ware on an F1 engine, i do.

Sorry for shouting....

Can I just correct you on one thing?

Because the engines are smaller now, 2.4, they can all rev to higher than 18,000RPM. Williams cracked the 20,000 barrier with a 3L V10 in 2004 (I think it was) so for these engines, revving to 20,000 is a piece of cake.

The point is, because of a regulation change, they are all limited to 18,000.


(Just realised you were saying the very same thing.

Not with it today at all but at least we agree on something!)

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

You said yourself they can go over,

I would like to take this opportunity to correct you there.
Read back through YOUR posts and I am sure you will find that YOU said they can go over it.
I said If they go over it wont harm the engine as they are the same engine as last years ones which rev'd to 19k

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

I would like to take this opportunity to correct you there.
Read back through YOUR posts and I am sure you will find that YOU said they can go over it.
I said If they go over it wont harm the engine as they are the same engine as last years ones which rev'd to 19k

Thats what i meant, sorry if i miss represented you.

vectra

EvilMonkey wrote: »

Thats what i meant, sorry if i miss represented you.

No worries bud

Charlie-Bravo

wow, that went massively off-topic....but still an interesting debate about engines and possible causes of blow-ups!:pac:

vectra

astrofluff wrote: »

wow, that went massively off-topic....but still an interesting debate about engines and possible causes of blow-ups!:pac:

Whats new around here